United States v. Martinez

5 Citing cases

  1. Salas v. Guadalupe Credit Union

    No. S-1-SC-39641 (N.M. Oct. 28, 2024)

    {¶26} With respect to an individual, it is clear that "[r]epresenting one's self in a legal proceeding does not constitute practicing law." United States v. Martinez, 1984-NMSC-072, ¶ 2, 101 N.M. 423, 684 P.2d 509 (holding that a judge could appear and defend himself in federal court without practicing law in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct)

  2. Schlieter v. Carlos

    108 N.M. 507 (N.M. 1989)   Cited 66 times
    Concluding that an appellate court “should exercise its discretion to decide the certified questions only with a full record before it, so that any decision on the constitutionality of [a statute] would not be based upon anecdotal and speculative argument”

    Contrary to the construction urged by defendants, Rule 12-607 does not contemplate a showing of no genuine issue as to any material fact to the end that our pretrial answer to novel questions of New Mexico law would be "determinative" in this narrow sense. For example, in United States v. Martinez, 101 N.M. 423, 684 P.2d 509 (1984), we held that a New Mexico judge could represent himself in civil proceedings without engaging in the practice of law as proscribed by the Canons of Judicial Conduct. This holding, although determinative of a major procedural question, i.e., who would conduct the defense at trial, was not dispositive of the existence of a claim or defense on the merits and did not put an end to the criminal proceedings.

  3. State v. Wolf

    No. A-1-CA-36779 (N.M. Ct. App. Jun. 26, 2018)

    [Unpaginated MIO 3-4] To the contrary, "[t]he practice of law is usually interpreted to entail the representation of others." United States v. Martinez, 1984-NMSC-072, ¶ 2, 101 N.M. 423, 684 P.2d 509. In addition, Defendant does not dispute the law relied upon in this Court's calendar notice.

  4. Lee v. Catron

    145 N.M. 573 (N.M. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that a non-attorney trustee could not represent a trust in court unless he was also the sole beneficiary

    {5} Our case law is clear that "[t]he practice of law is usually interpreted to entail the representation of others." United States v. Martinez, 101 N.M. 423, 423, 684 P.2d 509, 509 (1984). The representation of parties before judicial or administrative bodies constitutes the practice of law.

  5. Chisholm v. Rueckhaus

    124 N.M. 255 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 32 times
    Holding that a non-attorney parent could not represent his minor son in court

    Representing one's self in a legal proceeding does not constitute "the practice of law." United States v. Martinez, 101 N.M. 423, 423, 684 P.2d 509, 509 (1984). Representing another, however, does.